Trust based moderation

ABSTRACT

A network device, system, and method are directed towards detecting trusted reporters and/or abusive users in an online community using reputation event inputs, such as abuse reports. When an abuse report is received for a content item, the combined trust (reputation) of previous reporters on the reported content item and the trust (reputation) of the content author are compared to determine whether to trust the content item. If the content item is un-trusted, the content item may be hidden from public view. In one embodiment, the content item might still be visible to the content author, and/or members in the author&#39;s contact list, or the like, while being hidden from another user in the community. In one embodiment, the author may appeal the determined trust, and results of the appeal may be used to modify a trust of at least one reporter.

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present invention relates generally to content reputationdeterminations over a network, and more particularly but not exclusivelyto dynamically determining whether to enable content to be displayed ata content system based, in part, on comparison of a reputation of acontent abuse reporter and a reputation of a content author.

BACKGROUND

Today, a large number of websites enable users to post their own contentor submit references (such as hyperlinks) to content for display and/oruse by others. Such User Generated Content (UGC) based sites tend to bevulnerable to many forms of abuse, including, but not limited to spam,slurs, impersonation, illegal activities, posting of adult or otherimproper content, copyright violations, harassment, hate speech,exploitation of minors, and so forth, just to name but a few examples.Search engines suffer from the same problems while displaying searchresults from websites that have been manually submitted to the searchengine or automatically discovered by its crawlers.

Moreover, the ease in which a user might create multiple accounts andpost abusive content that might be immediately visible to millions ofusers makes such UGC based sites prime targets for abusers. Systems thatenjoy a high level of network traffic may be unable to afford the costsor time of having an administrator examine each posting of content forabuse. Hiring of administrators to perform such tasks might become costprohibitive for large and very popular UGC sites. However, many of thetraditional automatic content filtering mechanisms have beendemonstrated to be either ineffective, and/or require large amounts ofresources to review posted content to minimize false detections (e.g.,improperly detecting or failing to detect abusive content).

Several of today's UGC sites attempt to empower viewers of the contentto report abusive content. Unfortunately, some of these reporters ofabuse may also select to abuse the reporting system by falsely reportingcontent, targeting specific users for attack, such as falsely reportinggood content to have it deleted, or the like. In some instances, thereporters may even create multiple accounts and use them to falselyreport content. In some cases, a reporter might use one account togenerate the abusive content, and use another account to report theabusive content, so as to gain trust for the one account. If and whensuch individuals are detected, they may simply create yet anotheraccount under a different identity and continue with their abusivebehaviors of either generating abusive content and/or falsely reportingcontent as abusive. Therefore, it is with respect to theseconsiderations and others that the present invention has been made.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Non-limiting and non-exhaustive embodiments of the present invention aredescribed with reference to the following drawings. In the drawings,like reference numerals refer to like parts throughout the variousfigures unless otherwise specified.

For a better understanding of the present invention, reference will bemade to the following Detailed Descriptions, which is to be read inassociation with the accompanying drawings, wherein:

FIG. 1 shows a functional block diagram illustrating one embodiment ofan environment for use in managing reputations;

FIG. 2 shows one embodiment of a network device that may be employedwithin the environment illustrated in FIG. 1;

FIG. 3 illustrates a model diagram generally showing one embodiment ofan overview of process useable to determine a content item's abusereputation;

FIG. 4 illustrates a flow diagram generally showing one embodiment of anabuse suspicion object with event inputs;

FIG. 5 illustrates a flow diagram generally showing one embodiment of areporter's community investment reputation with event inputs;

FIG. 6 illustrates a flow diagram generally showing one embodiment of auser's abusive reputation with event inputs;

FIG. 7 illustrates a flow diagram generally showing one embodiment of aconfirmed abuse reporter's reputation with event inputs; and

FIG. 8 illustrates a functional block diagram conceptually illustratingone embodiment of an event or reputation statement useable indetermining a reputation.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The present invention now will be described more fully hereinafter withreference to the accompanying drawings, which form a part hereof, andwhich show, by way of illustration, specific exemplary embodiments bywhich the invention may be practiced. This invention may, however, beembodied in many different forms and should not be construed as limitedto the embodiments set forth herein; rather, these embodiments areprovided so that this disclosure will be thorough and complete, and willfully convey the scope of the invention to those skilled in the art.Among other things, the present invention may be embodied as methods ordevices. Accordingly, the present invention may take the form of anentirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment or anembodiment combining software and hardware aspects. The followingdetailed description is, therefore, not to be taken in a limiting sense.

Throughout the specification and claims, the following terms take themeanings explicitly associated herein, unless the context clearlydictates otherwise. The phrase “in one embodiment” as used herein doesnot necessarily refer to the same embodiment, though it may. As usedherein, the term “or” is an inclusive “or” operator, and is equivalentto the term “and/or,” unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Theterm “based on” is not exclusive and allows for being based onadditional factors not described, unless the context clearly dictatesotherwise. In addition, throughout the specification, the meaning of“a,” “an,” and “the” include plural references. The meaning of “in”includes “in” and “on.”

Briefly, the present invention is directed towards a network device,system, and method useable in detecting trusted reporters and/or abusiveusers in an online community using reputation event inputs, such asabuse reports. When an abuse report is received for a content item, thecombined trust (reputation) of previous reporters on the reportedcontent item and the trust (reputation) of the content author arecompared to determine whether to trust the content item. If the contentitem is un-trusted, the content item may be selectively hidden frompublic view. In one embodiment, the content item might still be visibleto the content author, and/or members in the author's contact list,buddy list, members with network addresses within a same or relatedsubnet, or the like, while being hidden from another user in thecommunity.

In one embodiment, the content author may receive a notificationindicating that content is hidden. The author may be provided anopportunity to correct the content based on a site policy, or even todiscard the content. In one embodiment, the author may appeal thedetermined reputation, and results of the appeal may be used to modify areputation of at least one reporter. In one embodiment, rather thanreviewing each content posting for abuse, or even each abuse reported,an appeal board might be configured and arranged to focus on thosecontent items for which an author specifically submits a request forappeal, or the board itself so selects. In cases where a content authoris identified as a repeat abusive poster, the author's postingpermission might be denied, an account for the author might be removed,or each submitted content item by the author might immediately behidden. In one embodiment, an abuse reporter that abuses the systemmight also be notified, have their account access revoked, their abusereports ignored, or the like. By employing a dynamic trusted group inthe online community of users to self-moderate content, the communityusers may become empowered and minimize gaming and abusive behavior.

In one embodiment, the reputation model may include at least twocomponents, one for determining an abuse reporter's reputation, andanother for determining an author's reputation. The model may computeand update reputation scores based on a variety of different users'actions over time. Content abuse reputations may be accumulated for eachreported content item based on a reputation of previous reporters. Thereputation of the abuse reporters, and/or the content author may bebased on a variety of factors, including, but not limited to an outcomeof a previous report, including an appeal, an investment in thecommunity of users of a website or content site providing the display ofthe content, abusive behaviors, time of activity, quality of thecontent, and a variety of other community feedback. In any event, if thecontent abuse reputation of a specific content item exceeds the trust(reputation) of the content item's author for that content item, thecontent item may be selectively hidden from display to at least one userof the content server.

Various filtering mechanisms may be employed to minimize or otherwiseprevent abuse of the reputation model by, for example, targetingspecific users, abusing gained trust, using multiple accounts to reportabuse, or the like.

It should be noted that the invention is not constrained by the exampleapplications as disclosed herein. As such, various embodiments may alsobe used to detect abusive search results, such as web searches, videosearches, audio searches, or the like, as well as abusive use of textmessaging, emails, user groups, forums, or the like.

Illustrative Environment

FIG. 1 is a functional block diagram illustrating an exemplary operatingenvironment 100 in which the invention may be implemented. Operatingenvironment 100 is only one example of a suitable operating environmentand is not intended to suggest any limitation as to the scope of use orfunctionality of the present invention. Thus, other well-knownenvironments and configurations may be employed without departing fromthe scope or spirit of the present invention.

As shown in the figure, operating environment 100 includes clientdevices 102-104, network 105, content server 108, and Content AbuseReputation Server (CARS) 106. Client devices 102-104 are incommunication with each other, content server 108, and CARS 106 throughnetwork 105.

Client devices 102-104 may include virtually any computing devicecapable of receiving and sending a message over a network, such asnetwork 105, to and from another computing device. The set of suchdevices described in one embodiment below generally includes computingdevices that are usually considered more specialized devices withlimited capabilities and typically connect using a wirelesscommunications medium such as cell phones, smart phones, pagers, radiofrequency (RF) devices, infrared (IR) devices, integrated devicescombining one or more of the preceding devices, or virtually anycomputing device, and the like. However, the set of such devices mayalso include devices that are usually considered more general purposedevices and typically connect using a wired communications medium at oneor more fixed location such as laptop computers, personal computers,multiprocessor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumerelectronics, network PCs, and the like. Similarly, client devices102-104 may be any device that is capable of connecting using a wired orwireless communication medium such as a personal digital assistant(PDA), POCKET PC, wearable computer, and any other device that isequipped to communicate over a wired and/or wireless communicationmedium.

Each client device within client devices 102-104 may include anapplication that enables a user to perform various operations. Forexample, each client device may include one or more messengerapplications that enables the client device to send and receive messagesto/from another computing device employing various communicationmechanisms, including, but not limited to Short Message Service (SMS),Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), Instant Messaging (IM), internetrelay chat (IRC), Mardam-Bey's internet relay chat (mIRC), Jabber,email, and the like.

Client devices 102-104 also may include at least one other clientapplication that is configured to provide and receive textual content,multimedia information, or the like. The client application may furtherprovide information that identifies itself, including a type,capability, name, or the like. In one embodiment, mobile devices 102-104may uniquely identify themselves through any of a variety of mechanisms,including a phone number, Mobile Identification Number (MIN), anelectronic serial number (ESN), network address, or other deviceidentifier. In one embodiment, a cookie might be employed to provide anidentifier. The information may also indicate a content format that theclient device is enabled to employ. Such information may be provided ina message, or the like, sent to, or other computing devices.

Client devices 102-104 may be further configured with a browserapplication that is configured to receive and to send content in avariety of forms, including, but not limited to markup pages, web-basedmessages, hyperlinks, video files, audio files, graphical files, filedownloads, applets, scripts, text, and the like. The browser applicationmay be configured to receive and display graphics, text, multimedia, andthe like, employing virtually any markup based language, including, butnot limited to a Handheld Device Markup Language (HDML), such asWireless Markup Language (WML), WMLScript, JavaScript, and the like,Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML), HyperText Markup Language(HTML), Extensible Markup Language (XML).

A user of one of client devices 102-104 might provide comments, ratings,or other value judgments about content viewed over the network. Forexample, the user might view an article, a blog page, an advertisement,a search result, a website, a hyperlink, a product, obtain a service, orthe like, from content server 108, or even access and download variouscontent, including, but not limited to music, documents, graphicalfiles, video files, or the like, from content server 108. The user maythen provide a comment or other value judgment about the content,product, service, or the like, using content server 108, and/or bysending the comment to CARS 106 directly. Such comment might beconfigured and organized, in one embodiment, in the form of a reputationstatement or report. Such reputation statements might be classified asabuse reports or as positive reports. An abuse report might indicate,for example, that the reporter considers the content to be abusive of apolicy, a procedure, a person, or the like. A positive report mightindicate that the reporter considers the content worthy of mention ashaving at least one desirable characteristic.

As an aside, one possible conceptual diagram useable to illustrate areputation statement, abuse report, positive report, or the like, isillustrated in FIG. 8. As shown in FIG. 8, report 800 may includeinformation about a source 802 of the report, a target 806 for which theabuse report is about, and claim 804 indicating a judgment about thetarget 806. Thus, as illustrated, report 800 represents a statementregarding a value judgment, comment, or claim by source 802 about target806.

In one embodiment, source 802 includes an identifier indicating thesource of report 800. In one embodiment, the source 802 is an abusereporter, or reporter of a positive report, or the like. In oneembodiment, the identifier might be provided by the user as part ofinputting and sending the abuse report, positive report, or the like.However, in another embodiment, the identifier might be automaticallyincluded such as might occur during preparation of a message (e.g., in amessage header), or the like. In one embodiment, the identifier mightalso be obtained automatically based on a network address, deviceaddress, user identifier, user account, or the like, obtained when theuser logs in to provide the report 800, or sends the message, or thelike. In one embodiment, a cookie, network address (e.g., IP address,device address), or the like, might even be used to determine source802's identifier.

Target 806 might include information identifying virtually any contentitem for which the claim 804 is about, including a search result,website, hyperlink, question, answer, video, image, audio, animation,news, user profile, avatar, a blog posting, a review, a board post, aproduct, a service, a merchant, another review, or virtually any othertype of content. For example, where an author of the content might postanswers to questions, target 806 may identify the answer posted, aquestion posted, or the like. However, it should be clear that target806 may represent virtually any content item that may be accessible byclient devices 102-104. Moreover, in one embodiment, target 806 mightalso identify a class of content items, called content types, such asmovies, restaurant reviews, or the like. By enabling report 800 to bedirected to content items, an author that provides different types ofcontent may receive different reputations. For example, where the authorposts content items associated with music reviews, restaurant reviews,or the like, the author may have one reputation for their music reviews,while a different reputation for their restaurant reviews. However, theauthor may also receive a reputation per a specific content item, aswell. Similarly, a reporter providing a report about content may alsoreceive different reputations based on different types of content typesreported.

Moreover, target 806 may include information identifying an author ofthe content item for which claim 804 is about. However, the invention isnot constrained to target 806 including information about the author ofthe content item. For example, information about the content item may beused to search for and/or otherwise identify an author of the contentitem. As used here, the term “author” refers to a user that submitscontent to be posted at content server 108. In addition, the term“author” may also refer to a website or service being crawled by asearch engine, or virtually any other source of content. Thus, while anauthor may, in one embodiment actually compose content that is to beposted through content server 108, the author may also submit contentthat the author did not directly compose. For example, an author mightcollect photographs, text, music, graphics, audio files, or the like,and submit them for posting. Similarly, an author might compose anarticle, music, an audio file, a video file, or the like, and thensubmit that for posting. Moreover, the author may also combine contentthat the author directly composed with another's content for submission.

Claim 804 may include comments and/or ratings from source 802 abouttarget 806. A comment may include qualitative elements and may be storedas text in a file, a message, a database, directory, or the like. Claim804 may include a rating that may also include a quantitative element,employing a variety of mechanisms, including grades, stars, a score, orthe like. Claim 804 may include adding an item to favorites,recommendation, sharing with others. For example, in one embodiment,claim 804 might be a judgment that content from target 806 is abusive,not abusive, or the like. As used herein, abuse may include any of avariety of subjective and/or objective criteria, including but notlimited to violations of terms of service or guidelines, spam, slurs,impersonation, illegal activities, posting of adult or other impropercontent, copyright violations, harassment, hate speech, exploitation ofminors, or so forth.

Moreover, in one embodiment, content server 108 might provide aselectable icon, form field, or the like, that a user might select orenter a comment into. In one embodiment, one selectable icon mightindicate that the user views the content as abusive, for any of avariety of reasons, including, but not limited to failing to comply withcontent server 108's posting policies, is viewed by the user asattacking the user, another user, or the like. In one embodiment,another selectable icon might indicate that the user views the contentas not abusive. In one embodiment, the user might view the content aspositive, based on a variety of criteria, thereby submitting a positivereport. As such, the user might be able to select either one of theicons as a mechanism for providing report 800. Similarly, the user mighthave a form field in which the user might enter text useable input claim804. It should be noted that the invention is not limited to these entrymechanisms, and others may be used, without departing from the scope ofthe invention.

It should be noted, that while report 800 represents one structure of arepresentation event or statement, the implementation is not limited tosuch structure, and other structures may readily be used, including afree form structure, form inputs, a table, or the like.

Returning to FIG. 1, network 105 is configured to couple client devices102-104, with each other, and/or other network devices. Network 105 isenabled to employ any form of computer readable media for communicatinginformation from one electronic device to another. In one embodiment,network 105 is the Internet, and may include local area networks (LANs),wide area networks (WANs), direct connections, such as through auniversal serial bus (USB) port, other forms of computer-readable media,or any combination thereof. On an interconnected set of LANs, includingthose based on differing architectures and protocols, a router may actas a link between LANs, to enable messages to be sent from one toanother. Also, communication links within LANs typically include twistedwire pair or coaxial cable, while communication links between networksmay utilize analog telephone lines, full or fractional dedicated digitallines including T1, T2, T3, and T4, Integrated Services Digital Networks(ISDNs), Digital Subscriber Lines (DSLs), wireless links includingsatellite links, or other communications links known to those skilled inthe art.

Network 105 may further employ a plurality of wireless accesstechnologies including, but not limited to, 2nd (2G), 3rd (3G), 4th (4G)generation radio access for cellular systems, Wireless-LAN, WirelessRouter (WR) mesh, and the like. Access technologies such as 2G, 3G, andfuture access networks may enable wide area coverage for network deviceswith various degrees of mobility. For example, network 105 may enable aradio connection through a radio network access such as Global Systemfor Mobil communication (GSM), General Packet Radio Services (GPRS),Enhanced Data GSM Environment (EDGE), Code Division Multiple Access(CDMA), Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA), or the like.

Furthermore, remote computers and other related electronic devices couldbe remotely connected to either LANs or WANs via a modem and temporarytelephone link. In essence, network 105 includes any communicationmethod by which information may travel between client devices 102-104,CARS 106, and/or content server 108.

Additionally, network 105 may include communication media that typicallyembodies computer-readable instructions, data structures, programmodules, or other data in a modulated data signal such as a carrierwave, data signal, or other transport mechanism and includes anyinformation delivery media. The terms “modulated data signal,” and“carrier-wave signal” includes a signal that has one or more of itscharacteristics set or changed in such a manner as to encodeinformation, instructions, data, and the like, in the signal. By way ofexample, communication media includes wired media such as, but notlimited to, twisted pair, coaxial cable, fiber optics, wave guides, andother wired media and wireless media such as, but not limited to,acoustic, RF, infrared, and other wireless media.

Content server 108 includes virtually any network computing device thatis configured to provide various resources, including content and/orservices over network 105. As such, content server 108 represents oneembodiment of a content system. Content server 108 may provide selectiveaccess to any of a variety of user submitted content, including, but notlimited to blog content, search results, websites, hyperlinks, userprofiles, ads, product/service reviews, merchant reviews, restaurantreviews, entertainment comments/reviews, as well as content that mayinclude audio files, video files, text files, streaming files, graphicalfiles, or the like. Thus, virtually any user generated content may beposted to content server 108, reviewed by a community of users ofcontent server 108, and receive comments and/or reports about suchcontent. Thus, in one embodiment, content server 108 might be configuredand arranged to provide a website for users to post, view, and/orprovide comments, and other reports on various content. Content server108 might also provide FTP services, APIs, web services, databaseservices, or the like, to enable users to post, view, and/or comment oncontent. However, content server 108 is not limited to these mechanisms,and/or content and others are envisaged as well.

Content server 108 may include an interface that may request informationfrom a user of client devices 102-104. For example, content server 108may provide access to an account, which may request user log-ininformation. Such log-in information may include a user name, password,or other identifier of the user and/or client device used by the user.

In one embodiment, content server 108 may be configured to send amessage to one or more of client devices 102-104 that includes a link toa web page hosted within content server 108. Moreover, content server108 may select to send a plurality of messages, bulk messages, or thelike, to client devices 102-104, including advertisements, or the like.

In addition, content server 108 may also provide a messaging service,such as a list server, or the like. Thus, users of client devices102-104 might send a message to a plurality of other users throughservices provided by content server 108, or the like. In one embodiment,the messages might therefore appear to be sent from content server 108rather than from the user employing such service. Thus, in oneembodiment, content server 108 might operate as a message forwarder, asubmit server for an Internet Service Provider (ISP), or the like.

Moreover, content server 108 might be configured to operate behind aproxy server, network address translator (NAT), Enhanced ServiceProvider (ESP), or the like. In such configurations, an actual networkaddress, such as an Internet Protocol (IP) address, or the like, mightnot be readily discernable.

Devices that may operate as content server 108 include, but are notlimited to personal computers, desktop computers, multiprocessorsystems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics,network PCs, servers, network appliances, and the like.

One embodiment of CARS 106 is described in more detail below inconjunction with FIG. 2. Briefly, however, CARS 106 includes virtuallyany network device that is configured to receive reports about contentavailable through content server 108, and to determine a reputation forvarious content items based on different users' actions over time. CARS106 may determine a content item abuse reputation based on a comparisonof an accumulated abuse reporter reputation and an overall contentcreation reputation of an author for the content item. In oneembodiment, if CARS 106 determines that the determined accumulated abusereporter reputation is equal to or exceeds the determined overallcontent creation reputation for the author for the content item, CARS106 may enable selective hiding a display of the content item on contentserver 108.

In one embodiment, CARS 106 may provide an appeals process to an authorto enable the author to appeal a reputation of a content item, areputation of the author, or the like. In one embodiment, a reportermight also be provided an opportunity to appeal their determinedreputation. In one embodiment, the author, reporter, or the like, mightbe provided a time limit in which to appeal, and if the author,reporter, or the like, fails to respond with the time limit, thedetermined reputation might be maintained and one or more reporters'and/or author's reputations may be adjusted. If the result of the appealis favorable to the author of the content item, in one embodiment, thehidden content item might be un-hidden. In one embodiment, the result ofthe appeal might be used to modify a reputation of the author, one ormore reporters of the content item, or the like. In one embodiment, theresult of the appeal might be employed to modify a reputation of networkaddresses, members in a buddy list, contact list, sub-network, or thelike, that may be associated with the author, the reporter, or the like.In any event, CARS 106 might employ a process such as described below inconjunction with FIGS. 3-7 to perform at least some of its actions.

Devices that may operate as CARS 106 include, but are not limited topersonal computers, desktop computers, multiprocessor systems,microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs,servers, network appliances, and the like. It should be noted that whilecontent server 108 and CARS 106 are illustrated as separate networkdevices, the invention is not so limited. Thus, for example, contentserver 108 and CARS 106 might reside within the same network device,without departing from the scope of the invention.

Illustrative Server Environment

FIG. 2 shows one embodiment of a network device, according to oneembodiment of the invention. Network device 200 may include many more orless components than those shown. The components shown, however, aresufficient to disclose an illustrative embodiment for practicing theinvention. Network device 200 may, for example, represent CARS 106 ofFIG. 1.

Network device 200 includes processing unit 212, video display adapter214, and a mass memory, all in communication with each other via bus222. The memory generally includes RAM 216, and ROM 232. Network device200 also includes one or more mass storage devices, such as hard diskdrive 228, tape drive, optical disk drive, and/or floppy disk drive. Thememory stores operating system 220 for controlling the operation ofnetwork device 200. Any general-purpose operating system may beemployed. Basic input/output system (“BIOS”) 218 is also provided forcontrolling the low-level operation of network device 200. Asillustrated in FIG. 2, network device 200 also can communicate with theInternet, or some other communications network, via network interfaceunit 210, which is constructed for use with various communicationprotocols including the TCP/IP protocol. Network interface unit 210 issometimes known as a transceiver, transceiving device, network interfacecard (NIC), or the like.

Network device 200 may also include an SMTP handler application fortransmitting and receiving email. Network device 200 may also include anHTTP handler application for receiving and handing HTTP requests, and anHTTPS handler application for handling secure connections. The HTTPShandler application may initiate communication with an externalapplication in a secure fashion.

Network device 200 also may include input/output interface 224 forcommunicating with external devices, such as a mouse, keyboard, scanner,or other input devices not shown in FIG. 2. Likewise, network device 200may further include additional mass storage facilities such as opticaldisk drive 226 and hard disk drive 228. Hard disk drive 228 is utilizedby network device 400 to store, among other things, applicationprograms, databases, or the like.

The memory and/or mass storage as described above illustrates anothertype of computer-readable media, namely computer storage media. Computerstorage media may include volatile, nonvolatile, removable, andnon-removable media implemented in any method or technology for storageof information, such as computer readable instructions, data structures,program modules, or other data. Examples of computer storage mediainclude RAM, ROM, EEPROM, flash memory or other memory technology,CD-ROM, digital versatile disks (DVD) or other optical storage, magneticcassettes, magnetic tape, magnetic disk storage or other magneticstorage devices, or any other medium which can be used to store thedesired information and which can be accessed by a computing device.

The memory also stores program code and data. One or more applications250 are loaded into memory and run on operating system 220. Examples ofapplication programs include schedulers, calendars, transcoders,database programs, word processing programs, spreadsheet programs,security programs, web servers, and so forth. Mass storage may furtherinclude applications such reputation service (RS) 252, message server254, and data store 256.

Data store 256 is configured and arranged to store and otherwise managemessages, statistical data, reputation reports, volume reports, or thelike. Data store 256, however, is not limited to managing storage ofthese example items, and other items, data, information, or the like,may also be stored within data store 256, without departing from thescope of the invention. For example, data store 256 may also includeuser account information, policies, procedures or the like, useable forinhibiting delivery of spam, inhibiting display of a content item,appeal report status, or the like. Moreover, data store 256 may beemployed to maintain historical data, such as predictions, reputationreports, and the like. Data store 256 may be implemented using a varietyof technologies, including, but not limited to, folders, spreadsheets,data bases, scripts, applications, or the like.

Message server 254 may include virtually any computing component orcomponents configured and arranged to forward messages from message useragents, and/or other message servers, or to deliver messages to a localmessage store, such as data store 256, or the like. Thus, message server254 may include a message transfer manager to communicate a messageemploying any of a variety of email protocols, including, but notlimited, to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP), Post Office Protocol(POP), Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP), NNTP, or the like.

However, message server 254 is not constrained to email messages, andother messaging protocols may also be managed by one or more componentsof message server 254. Thus, message server 254 may also be configuredto manage SMS messages, IM, MMS, IRC, mIRC, or any of a variety of othermessage types.

In any event, message server 254 may be configured to provide reports toRS 252 indicating information about messages. Such reports may includeinformation about a volume of messages received by users of messageserver 254, a volume of determined bulk messages received, informationabout messages received by known fake message addresses (trap reports),Address book entries, or the like.

RS 252 is configured and arranged to receive input from a community ofusers that include statements about a content item. RS 252 may employ,in part, the received reports or statements, and quickly predict whetherthe content item should be selectively hidden from display at a networkdevice.

RS 252 may include several sub-components including a component that isconfigured and arranged to determine an abuse reporter's reputation, andat least another component that is configured and arranged to determinean author's reputation for a content item. As noted above, an authormight have different reputations based on different content items. Forexample, an author might be determined to have a favorable or positivereputation for reviews associated with movies, but an unfavorablereputation for reviews of coffee pots. RS 252 might also include acomponent that is configured and arranged to make a comparison betweenthe determined reputations and determine whether a content item shouldbe selectively hidden from display. RS 252 might further include anothercomponent that is configured and arranged to provide a notification toan author indicating that a content item's reputation. In oneembodiment, RS 252 may be configured to enable the author to employ anappeal process to appeal the determined reputation. It should be noted,that a reporter of a comment about a content item might similarly beprovided an appeal process to appeal their determined reputation, aswell. RS 252 may employ the process described below in conjunction withFIGS. 3-7 to perform at least some of its actions.

Generalized Operation

The operation of certain aspects of the present invention will now bedescribed with respect to FIGS. 3-7. FIG. 3 illustrates a model diagramgenerally showing one embodiment of an overview of process useable todetermine a content item's abuse reputation. As shown in the figure, theillustrated blocks may, in one embodiment, represent objects that areconfigured to perform actions based on an input, such as from anotherblock, an event, or the like. In one embodiment, the blocks may bestorable values for a given content item.

Briefly, as shown in FIG. 3, sub-process 340 of model 300 is configuredand arranged to determine a content item abuse reputation based, inpart, on an accumulated determined reputations for each reporter ofabuse reports for the content item. Sub-process 350 of model 300 isconfigured and arranged to determine a reputation of an author fordifferent content items and content types. Thus, for example, block 311of sub-process 350 might provide an author's overall reputation for onecontent item (or type), while block 310 of sub-process 350 might providethe author's overall reputation of another content item (or type).

At decision block 316, the results of sub-process 340 may then becompared to the results of one of block 311, block 310, or the like, todetermine whether selectively to hide the display of the content item.If so, then process 300 flows to block 322, where the content item maybe selectively hidden. That is, in one embodiment, the abusive contentitem might be hidden from view by some members of the community of usersto the content site, while still visible to specific other users orgroups. For example, in one embodiment, the content item might bevisible at the content site by the author of the content item. Inanother embodiment, users determined to be associated with the authormight also be able to view the hidden content item. Such users might bedetermined based on the author's network address, a cookie, a buddylist, contact list, address book, messages between the author and/orother members of the user community, or the like. In this manner, theexposure of the abusive content item to the community may be limited andthe time it may take the abusive author to detect the change may bedelayed. In one embodiment, this mechanism may also be used to hide asuspicious author's content (including other users that are associatedto the same person using multiple accounts) until the content isverified as non-abusive, abusive, or otherwise.

In one embodiment, at block 322, the author might receive a notificationthat the content item is hidden or removed from the content site. Inthis manner, the author might be provided an opportunity to appeal thedecision. If the author fails to appeal the decision, or acts to removethe content, then the decision that the content item is abusive may bemaintained. If the author successfully appeals the decision, the contentitem might be un-hidden. In any instance, the result of the appealprocess, or the fact that the author did not appeal in a timely manner,may be used, as described further below, to modify a reputation of anabuse reporter, a reporter that provided a positive report on thecontent item, and/or the author's reputation. The result of the appealprocess may also be used, in one embodiment, to modify a reputation ofat least one user related to the reporter and/or author.

The appeal process may be implemented using any of a variety ofmechanisms. In one embodiment, the appeal process may be managedautomatically, using surveys, voting, or the like. In anotherembodiment, the appeal process may include at least some humanintervention, such as a through an appeal board, customer care board,administrator review board, arbitration review board, or the like.

If, at decision block 316, it is determined that the content item is notabusive, processing flows to block 320, where the content item mayremain visible to the community of users to the content site. In oneembodiment, the decision that the content item is abusive might also beused to modify a reputation of an abuse reporter, a reputation reporterthat provided a positive report on the content item, the author'sreputation, and/or another user.

As shown in the figure, sub-process 340 includes blocks 301-307, and312, Sub-process 350 includes blocks 308-311, and 314-315. Each of theseblocks will now be discussed in more detail, with, in some instances,references to FIGS. 4-7.

At block 312, an abusive confidence reputation is determined based on alevel of confidence that a network address or other identifierrepresents a single user. That is, when a report is received from auser, a user posts content, or the like, or a user visits the contentsite, information about the user is obtained. In one embodiment, theinformation might include cookie information, a network address, aclient device identifier, a user account identifier, or the like. In oneembodiment, activities by the user might be monitored at the contentsite, to attempt to determine whether the activities appear to be from asingle user, or a group of users. The activities might be from a groupof users, for example, when several users employ the same client device,when the network address is behind a proxy device which supportsmultiple users, or when the network address is associated with asub-network, or the like. Thus, at block 312, a determination is made toattempt to determine a confidence level in whether the actions are by asingle person that created multiple accounts or multiple differentusers. Such information may then be employed by block 301, for example,in determining a reporter's abuse suspicion reputation. The model may beconfigured however, to avoid collectively punishing innocent usersbecause they share one or more identifiers with one or more abusivepersons. In one embodiment, the confidence level that an identifier isused by an abusive person rather than by different users can berepresented by the percentage of previously detected abusive users outof the total active users using the same identifier during a specifictime period. In one embodiment, proxies and shared devices may befiltered or their reputation is weighed based on their confidence level.

Block 301 is illustrated in diagram 400 of FIG. 4 and is used todetermine a reporter's abuse suspicion reputation. In one embodiment,the reporter's abuse suspicion reputation may be used as an input toabuse reporter bootstrap reputation 304. As illustrated, block 301 mayreceive a variety of event inputs, including, abuse profile from thirdparties 402, community reports on reporter 403 including that the userwas blocked, ignored, thumbed down, reported by other users, and reportsabout abuse confidence reputation 404, which may be obtained, from block312.

Abuse profile from third parties 402 represents inputs from a variety ofsources other than the community of users. Machine classification outputlike spam detection, machine learning, or rules may be used to indicatewhether the user is abusive by examining, for example, the user'scontent, profile info, or avatar image. Thus, if another content sitehas information about the reporter and shares such information, it maybe used to determine the reporter's abuse suspicion reputation.Similarly, if the user community has blocked or ignored the reporter,provided abuse reports about the reporter, voted thumbs down on commentsby the reporter in the past, or otherwise provided comments about thereporter, such input may be received through community reports on thereporter 403. As noted, block 301 may also employ information from block312 to balance whether such actions are related to a single user ormultiple users, as seen by input 404 of FIG. 4. Block 301 is not limitedto receiving merely the inputs illustrated in FIG. 4, and other inputsmay also be used. In any event, block 301 may combine the inputs todetermine a value that represents the report's presumed abusivebehavior. Because the inputs to block 301 might be viewed as pastbehaviors not necessarily directly related to the reporter's currentactivities of providing an abuse report, the output of block 301 mightbe seen an providing a low confidence reputation value.

FIG. 5 illustrates a flow diagram 500 generally showing one embodimentof a reporter's community investment reputation 302 with input events.Block 302 represents a reporter's historical investment in the communitysite. In one embodiment, block 302 may be configured to provide aninvestment specific to a content topic, such as investing, cooking, orthe like or category of content types, such as music content, videocontent, or the like. Alternatively, block 302 might also provide anoverall reporter's community investment reputation based on a variety ofactivities, by the reporter.

As such, in one embodiment, various inputs may be employed to determinethe reporter's community investment reputation, including, but notlimited to the reporter's activity value 502 which is directed towardindicating how active the reporter is in the community. For example, areporter that shares content with other members might have a highervalue for input 502 then a reporter that merely reads content.

Another possible input, reporter's membership value 503 attempts toprovide a value associated with the reporter's membership duration,including whether the reporter is a new user to the community site,whether the reporter has been a member for some defined time, or thelike. For example, if the reporter is determined to be fairly new, input503 might be a lower value than if the reporter has been a member forseveral years. Similarly, the reporter's contribution value 504 mightalso be an input useable to determine the reporter's communityinvestment reputation 302. For example, if the reporter also contributescontent to the community site, the reporter might be more valued than areporter that merely reads content. In one embodiment, such inputs502-504 might be averaged to determine the reporter's communityinvestment reputation 302; however, the invention is not so limited, andone or more of the inputs 502-504 might be more heavily weighted thananother input. Moreover, it should be noted that the invention is notlimited to the inputs 502-504 illustrated, and other inputs may also beused to determine a reporter's community investment reputation 302. Forexample, in one embodiment, a quality level of the reporter's activitiesmight be used as an input, an age, a social status, any financialcontributions to the community that the reporter may have made, or anyof a variety of other inputs might also be used.

FIG. 6 illustrates a flow diagram 600 generally showing one embodimentof a user's abusive reputation 303 with event inputs 602-606. The out ofblock 303 represents a historic, confirmed content related abuse by theuser. Thus, the value output by block 303 may be determined to have ahigh confidence reputation.

As illustrated user's abusive reputation 303 may receive a variety ofdifferent inputs, including input indicating whether a user has beensuspended as abusive 602, and a status of an appeal process 603 forwhich the user is associated, whether the user is identified as atroll/spammer or the like 604. Input 605 represents the user's contentactivities, including, for example, whether the user has edited,deleted, or otherwise modified posted content after it was hidden, orthe like. Input 606 represents whether the user's content has beendeleted in the past, such as due to an appeal process, by administratorsbecause of violating guidelines or terms of service, a determinedreputation, or the like. It should be clear that other abusiveactivities, actions, or the like, may also be used to determine theuser's abusive reputation. Thus, those identified are not intended tolimit the invention, but merely to represent possible inputs. The inputs602-606 may be combined using a variety of mechanisms, including, butnot limited to a weighted average, or the like.

FIG. 7 illustrates a flow diagram 700 generally showing one embodimentof a confirmed abuse reporter's reputation 305 with event inputs. Theevents may describe the status of the content items reported by a user(abuse reporter). As shown, block 305 may receive a variety of inputs,including, but not limited to a reported content status 702, and areported content appeal status 703. Reported content status 702represents, for example, whether the reported user has deleted contentunder appeal, or otherwise modified and/or deleted content that ishidden. Reported content appeal status 703 represents, for example,whether the appeal process has expired, whether the result of the appealprocess included deleting the content, rejected the appeal, and/orapproved the appeal such that the content is to be un-hidden. In oneembodiment, such inputs may be averaged, summed, or otherwise combinedusing a variety of mechanisms, including, but not limited to a weightedsummation. Because the inputs to block 305 are based on confirmedactions, the output of block 305 may be considered to be of a highconfidence reputation value.

Returning to FIG. 3, it is shown that blocks 301-303 may provide inputsto block abuse reporter bootstrap reputation 304, which represents areputation value when a user has not yet accumulated a sufficient abusereporter reputation. A sufficient abuse reporter reputation may be basedon a variety of factors, including, for example, whether the user hassubmitted a defined number of credible abuse reports, a defined numberof positive reports, or the like. However, block 304 may also beemployed where the user has been a member to the community site for lessthan a defined amount of time, or any of a variety of other criteria. Inany event, at block 304, the inputs 301-303 may be combined using, forexample, a weighted average, or using virtually any other mechanism togenerate an abuse reporter's bootstrap reputation 304. Thresholds may beused to filter out reports by new users, excessive reporting by a user,network address, device and other criteria.

Block 306 is configured and arranged to determine an abuse reporter'sreputation based, in part, on a combination of confirmed (block 305)and/or bootstrap (block 304) values. In one embodiment the confirmed(block 305) reputation value might be used fully when a user hassatisfied the sufficient abuser reporter reputation criteria asdiscussed above. In another embodiment, however, the bootstrap (block304) reputation value might also be used. In one embodiment, a linearcombination of the confirmed (block 305) reputation value and thebootstrap (block 304) reputation value might be used, to generate theabuse reporter's reputation 306.

Block 307 represents an accumulation of all abuse reporters' abusereporting reputations for a given content item. Thus, in one embodiment,the reputation value generated at block 307 may represent a content itemabuse reputation that is determined through reputations of the abusereporters submitting abuse reports for the content item. It should benoted, however, the block 307 may include other inputs in determiningthe content item abuse reputation. In one embodiment, machine classifieroutput, such as spam detector, abusive visual detector, user or deviceor network address blacklists, or other set of rules, may be used to asan additional input to determine the abusive reputation of a contentitem. For example, actions taken during the appeal process, includingwhether the content item is deleted or undeleted, whether the appealprocess rejected or approved the appeal, or the like, may also be usedto determine the content item abuse reputation. For example, where theappeal process resulted in approving display of the content item, in oneembodiment, the accumulated reputations of each reporter of an abusereport for the content item might be ignored.

As noted above, while sub-process 340 is directed towards determining areputation based, in part, on the abuse reporters' reputations,sub-process 350 is directed towards determining the content item'sauthor's overall content creation reputation.

Thus, blocks 314-315 are configured and arranged to determine contenttype's 1-N's quality reputation. In one embodiment, a content type mightrepresent a classification of content items, such as movies,restaurants, or the like. However, content types might also represent,in one embodiment, different content items. Thus, for example, contenttype 1 might represent a particular movie review, while content type Nor the like, might represent a review for a different movie. In oneembodiment, there may be multiple dimensions. For example, one dimensionmight be content types, N, while another dimension might be contentitems per type, M.

In any event, various inputs might be received and combined at block314-315 based on the content type. For example, such inputs mightinclude, but are not limited to, positive reports from users, actions byusers including emailing other users about the content item, saving tofavorites, a customer care board's actions on the content type, or thelike. In one embodiment, the inputs may be combined using a weightedsummation, or other combination.

Blocks 308-309 represent the author's good reputation for a contenttype. In one embodiment, the reputation value generated at blocks308-309 might be based on a running average of the outputs of blocks314-315, respectively. In another embodiment, older events might have alower weight on the final reputation score. However, in anotherembodiment, the output value of blocks 308-309 may be modified toaccount for low volumes of positive inputs, or the like. In any event,the outputs of blocks 308-309 represent the author's good reputation fora given content type.

At blocks 310-311 the author's overall reputation for a content type(1-N) is determined by combining an aggregation of the author'sconfirmed abusive reputation from block 303 with the aggregation of theauthor's good reputation for the content item from blocks 308-309.

As noted above a determination of whether or not to hide a content itemmay then be based on a comparison at decision block 316 of thereputations determined from sub-process 340 and 350. That is, in oneembodiment, if the determined content item abuse reputation (fromsub-process 340) is equal to or exceeds the determined overall contentcreation reputation for the author for the content item (fromsub-process 350), then the content item may be selectively hidden fromdisplay on the content site. Other factors may be used at decision block316, for example, the author's reputation can be boosted if he wasfalsely reported before in order to protect him from future falsedeletions by the community.

It will be understood that each block of the flowchart illustration, andcombinations of blocks in the flowchart illustration, can be implementedby computer program instructions. These program instructions may beprovided to a processor to produce a machine, such that theinstructions, which execute on the processor, create means forimplementing the actions specified in the flowchart block or blocks. Thecomputer program instructions may be executed by a processor to causeoperational steps to be performed by the processor to produce a computerimplemented process such that the instructions, which execute on theprocessor to provide steps for implementing the actions specified in theflowchart block or blocks. In one embodiment, at least some of theoperational steps may be performed serially; however, the invention isnot so limited, and at least some steps may be performed concurrently.

Accordingly, blocks of the flowchart illustration support combinationsof means for performing the specified actions, combinations of steps forperforming the specified actions and program instruction means forperforming the specified actions. It will also be understood that eachblock of the flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustration, can be implemented by special purposehardware-based systems which perform the specified actions or steps, orcombinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.

Alternate Embodiments and Other Considerations

It is understood that as users to the community site learn more aboutthe process used to selectively hide a content item, at least some ofthe user's actions may change. For example, it is recognized that someusers may select to abuse their power. As described above, it is acombined contribution of abuse reporters, an appeal process, andpositive reports that are used to automatically determine whether tohide a content item. Moreover, selective abusive actions by users in thecommunity may also be managed using the disclosed invention.

For example, consider a user that falsely reports good content trying todelete it, or a reporting troll that randomly reports a large quantityof content. For such users, the model disclosed above may be configuredto not weight a new user's input for some defined time period. Moreover,abusive users will have their reputations diminished over time, suchthat their reports will not be trusted, or may be completely ignored bythe model.

Similarly, where a user creates multiple accounts and uses them tofalsely report content, or creates puppet accounts and used them to postabusive content may also be addressed by the above model. As notedabove, reports, as well as various other activities by users may bemonitored, and associated with network addresses, or other identifiers.Such information may then be correlated to determine whether the abuseis from a single user or multiple different users. The information maythen be employed to modify the reputation of the abusive user.

Where a user with a high reputation value falsely reports good contentof another user, such situations may also be managed by the above model.For example, by employing the appeal process, and modifying reputationsof users based, in part, on the result of the appeal process, the userwith the high reputation may end up with a ‘tarnished’ reputation.Similarly, the targeted author might enjoy limited protection based onan increased reputation. Such examples are just a few possible attemptedmisuses a user might perform on a community site. However, the model isconfigured to address at least these abuses, as well as others. Thus,the model should not be considered to be limited to these abuses, andothers are considered and addressed by the model as well.

Older events may have less relevancy as newer events since users maychange their behaviors over time. In one embodiment, time decay may beapplied to events and/or reputations. Older events will have less weighton reputations scores. In another embodiment, reputations may be decayedbased on their last update time.

The above specification, examples, and data provide a completedescription of the manufacture and use of the composition of theinvention. Since many embodiments of the invention can be made withoutdeparting from the spirit and scope of the invention, the inventionresides in the claims hereinafter appended.

1. A network device for selectively managing display of content items ona content system over a network, comprising: a transceiver to send andreceive data over the network; and a processor that is operative toperform actions, including: receiving at least one abuse report from aplurality of abuse reporters indicating that a content item isconsidered to be abusive by each reporter; determining a content itemabuse reputation based, in part, on an accumulation of determinedreputations for each reporter of the received at least one abuse reportfor the content item; determining for an author of the content item anoverall content creation reputation for the content item; andselectively hiding a display of the content item on the content systembased on a comparison between the determined content item abusereputation and the determined overall content creation reputation forthe author for the content item, wherein selectively hiding the displayof the content item on the content system further comprises inhibitingdisplay of the content item on the content system to at least onevisitor to the content system, while enabling at least the author of thecontent item to view the display of the content item on the contentsystem.
 2. The network device of claim 1, wherein determining an overallcontent creation reputation for the author for the content item furthercomprises: determining an aggregation of the author's reputation for thecontent item based, in part, on a reporter's input; determining anaggregation of the author's confirmed abusive reputation; anddetermining the overall content creation reputation for the author forthe content item by combining the determined aggregation of the author'sreputation with the determined aggregation of the author's confirmedabusive reputation.
 3. The network device of claim 1, whereindetermining the content item abuse reputation further comprising:determining an abuse reporter's reputation for each reporter of an abusereport for the content item based in part on at least one of a confirmedabuse reporter reputation or an abuse reporter bootstrap reputationdetermination; and combining the determined abuse reporter's reputationsfor each reporter to determine the accumulated abuse reporterreputation.
 4. The network device of claim 3, wherein the bootstrapreputation determination further comprises: determining for eachreporter an abuse suspicion reputation; determining for each reporter anhistorical investment in the content system; determining for eachreporter a confirmed abusive reputation; and combining at least one ofthe abuse suspicion reputation, the historical investment, or theconfirmed abusive reputation to determine a bootstrap reputation foreach reporter.
 5. The network device of claim 3, wherein the confirmedabuse reporter reputation further comprises determining the confirmedabuse reporter reputation based, in part, on at least one of a status ofan appeal by the author for the content item, or a status of the displayof the content item on the content system.
 6. The network device ofclaim 3, wherein the abuse suspicion reputation is determined based, inpart, on a detected activity for each reporter at the content system. 7.A method for use in managing display of content at a content system overa network, comprising: receiving at least one abuse report from each ofa plurality of abuse reporters indicating that each abuse reporterconsiders a display of a content item on the content system to beabusive, in violation of terms of service or guideline, inappropriate,or illegal; determining an accumulated abuse reporters' reputation forthe content item based, in part, on reputations of each abuse reporterof the received at least one abuse report; determining a reputation ofan author of the content item; selectively hiding a display of thecontent item on the content system based on a result of a comparisonbetween the determined reputation of the author for the content item andthe determined accumulated abuse reporters' reputation; if the contentitem is determined to be selectively hidden, notifying the author of thecontent item of an availability of an appeal process; receiving arequest from the author of the content item to employ the appealprocess; and employing an outcome of the appeal process to modify atleast one of a reputation of at least one abuse reporter or thereputation of the author of the content item.
 8. The method of claim 7,wherein determining the reputation of the author of the content itemfurther comprises: determining the reputation of the author based on acomparison of an aggregation of the author's confirmed abusivereputation to an aggregation of the author's positive reputation basedon positive input from at least one user of the content system; and ifthe author is determined to be a new user to the content system,modifying the determined reputation of the author to induce an initialpositive reputation of the author for the content item.
 9. The method ofclaim 8, wherein determining the accumulated abuse reporters' reputationfurther comprises: determining a reputation of each abuse reporterbased, in part, on a confirmed abuse reporter reputation that isdetermined based on at least one of a status of an appeal for anothercontent item in which the reporter provided an abuse report or apositive report, or an activity of a customer care for the other contentitem in which the reporter provided the abuse report or the positivereport.
 10. The method of claim 9, wherein determining the reputation ofeach abuse reporter further comprises: determining an abuse reporterbootstrap reputation for each abuse reporter based, in part, on at leastone of a confirmed abuse reporter abusive reputation, and determinedcommunity investment reputation for the respective abuse reporter; anddetermining the reputation for the respective abuse reporter based on atleast one of the abuse reporter bootstrap reputation and the confirmedabuse reporter reputation.
 11. The method of claim 7, whereindetermining a reputation for each abuse reporter further comprisesemploying, for each respective abuse reporter, at least one of anoutcome of a previous abuse report by the respective abuse reporter, aninvestment in a community for the content system by the respective abusereporter, or an abusive behavior by the respective abuse reporter. 12.The method of claim 7, wherein selectively hiding of the display of thecontent item at the content system further comprises enabling at leastthe author of the content item to view the display of the content itemat the content system, while inhibiting display of the content item atthe content system to another user of the content system.
 13. A systemfor use in managing display of content over a network, comprising: acontent server configured and arranged to display submitted contentitems; and reputation service configured and arranged to receive atleast one of an abuse report or a positive report for at least one usergenerated content item, and to perform actions, including: determining acontent item abuse reputation based, in part, on an accumulation ofdetermined reputations for each abuse reporter of a plurality of abusereporters providing an abuse report for the content item; determiningfor an author of the content item an author reputation for the contentitem; selectively hiding a display of the content item on the contentsystem based on a result of a comparison between the determined contentitem abuse reputation and the determined author reputation for thecontent item; and if it is determined that the author of the contentitem to be selectively hidden is a repeat abusive author, enablingdeletion of each content item automatically from the content server,absent notification to the author.
 14. The system of claim 13, whereindetermining the author reputation further comprises: determining anauthor's good reputation for the content item based, in part, on atleast one positive report for the content item; determining an author'sabusive reputation based, in part, on activities by the author that areconfirmed by at least one customer care entity or administrator; andcombining the author's determined good reputation with the author'sdetermined abusive reputation to determine the author reputation for thecontent item.
 15. The system of claim 13, wherein determiningreputations for each abuse reporter further comprises combining at leastone of a status of an appeal process for another content item in whichthe respective abuse reporter submitted an abuse report, or a status ofanother content item in which the respective abuse reporter submitted anabuse report with an abusive reputation of the respective abusereporter.
 16. The system of claim 13, wherein determining reputationsfor each abuse reporter further comprises determining an abuse reporterbootstrap reputation based in part on network activities determined tobe abusive by network addresses determined to be related to a networkaddress of the respective abuse reporter.
 17. The system of claim 13,wherein the reputation service is configured to perform actions, furthercomprising: providing an appeal process to the author of the contentitem; receiving a request from the author of the content item to employthe appeal process; and employing an outcome of the appeal process tomodify at least one of the determined accumulated abuse reporterreputation or the author reputation.
 18. The system of claim 13, whereina determined reputation for each abuse reporter further comprises:determining a confidence level that a report is associated with a singleabuse reporter as opposed to a plurality of reporters based on apercentage of previously detected abusive users out of a total of activeusers using a same identifier during a defined time period; andemploying the confidence level to modify the determined reputation for arespective abuse reporter.